28.01.2015 Views

Deep Borehole Disposal of Nuclear Waste: Report from a Sandia ...

Deep Borehole Disposal of Nuclear Waste: Report from a Sandia ...

Deep Borehole Disposal of Nuclear Waste: Report from a Sandia ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

Introduction<br />

On October 26, 2011 <strong>Sandia</strong> National Laboratories brought together twenty<br />

representatives <strong>from</strong> the fields <strong>of</strong> radioactive waste disposal and drilling to:<br />

review the state <strong>of</strong> deep borehole science and engineering; identify the<br />

necessary features <strong>of</strong> a deep borehole pilot demonstration; and consider<br />

organizational approaches to implementing a deep borehole pilot. Andrew<br />

Orrell (<strong>Sandia</strong>) presented an overview <strong>of</strong> <strong>Deep</strong> <strong>Borehole</strong> <strong>Disposal</strong> with a<br />

discussion <strong>of</strong> the vision and model for creating an industry/lab/academia<br />

consortium to pursue a demonstration, followed by a discussion <strong>of</strong> borehole<br />

pilot testing at the Climax stock in Nevada in the early 1980’s (Brady – <strong>Sandia</strong>),<br />

then a description <strong>of</strong> a recently issued base case reference borehole design<br />

(Arnold, Brady et al. 2011) <strong>from</strong> Bill Arnold (<strong>Sandia</strong>). Mike Driscoll (MIT) and<br />

Fergus Gibb (Sheffield) outlined alternative designs and novel rock-welding and<br />

sealing approaches (The individual presentations can be found below). A<br />

summary <strong>of</strong> the meeting discussions follows.<br />

Discussion<br />

<strong>Deep</strong> borehole disposal is calculated to be as safe as traditional mined geologic<br />

repositories (Brady, Arnold et al. 2009) but more flexible, less expensive<br />

(Arnold, Brady et al. 2011), and more rapidly implemented. Minus<br />

transportation and licensing costs, borehole disposal is estimated to cost about<br />

$158/kg HM (Arnold, Brady et al. 2011), substantially less than the cost<br />

estimated for Yucca Mountain and possibly less than the current collected<br />

nuclear waste fund fee on a per kg basis.<br />

A significant science and engineering literature <strong>of</strong> deep borehole disposal has<br />

accumulated (see Table 1 and the presentations at the end <strong>of</strong> this report) and<br />

important features <strong>of</strong> the approach have been pilot-tested (Patrick 1986).<br />

Table 1. Partial listing <strong>of</strong> borehole technical articles<br />

Subject<br />

Article<br />

<strong>Borehole</strong> Engineering analysis<br />

(Juhlin and Sandstedt 1989; Juhlin and<br />

Sandstedt 1989; Nirex 2004; Beswick<br />

2008)<br />

<strong>Borehole</strong> geochemistry<br />

(Anderson 2004; Brady, Arnold et al.<br />

2009)<br />

Rock welding for borehole plugging (Gibb, Taylor et al. 2008)<br />

Heat flow<br />

(O’Brein, Cohen et al. 1979; Brady,<br />

Arnold et al. 2009)<br />

Cannister design (Hoag 2006)<br />

<strong>Borehole</strong> support matrices (Gibb, McTaggart et al. 2008)<br />

Site selection for disposal <strong>of</strong> Pu in<br />

(Heiken and al. 1996)<br />

boreholes

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!